Jump to content

Is QFT really silly?

AUDI R6
in Trash Can

Featured Replies

Well  I dont understand why people accept QFT since Relativity and QM are not "physically" connected? This shows how stupid Paul Dirac and all those who continued his work.

1 minute ago, AUDI R6 said:

Well  I dont understand why people accept QFT since Relativity and QM are not "physically" connected? This shows how stupid Paul Dirac and all those who continued his work.

Thank you and thanks for all the fish...

2 minutes ago, AUDI R6 said:

This shows how stupid Paul Dirac and all those who continued his work.

!

Moderator Note

We don't attack people here. Stick to attacking ideas you don't understand, and at least you won't be breaking the rules.

 
17 minutes ago, AUDI R6 said:

Well  I dont understand why people accept QFT

Probably because it works, you know like computers and stuff...

Shouldn't this these be in the trash, or at the very least pseudoscience?

Edited by Bufofrog

15 minutes ago, AUDI R6 said:

This shows how stupid Paul Dirac and all those who continued his work.

LOL

If, in spite of the rules, you are going to call people stupid, at least get the grammar right.

16 minutes ago, AUDI R6 said:

Well  I dont understand...

A lot of things, including the use of apostrophes.

  • Author
16 minutes ago, Phi for All said:
!

Moderator Note

We don't attack people here. Stick to attacking ideas you don't understand, and at least you won't be breaking the rules.

 

Attack dead mans?Dirac,Feynmann...

4 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

Probably because it works, you know like computers and stuff...

Shouldn't this these be in the trash, or at the very least pseudoscience?

Tell me how it works...

1 minute ago, AUDI R6 said:

Attack dead mans?Dirac,Feynmann...

Tell me how it works...

The basic idea is wrong , you cant combine QM with relativity , something which predicts the outcome with something real.

6 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

Probably because it works, you know like computers and stuff...

Shouldn't this these be in the trash, or at the very least pseudoscience?

something not real with something real....

2 minutes ago, AUDI R6 said:

The basic idea is wrong , you cant combine QM with relativity , something which predicts the outcome with something real.

!

Moderator Note

Your incredulity is not a valid argument. Unless you can show an error in the mathematics this thread will be closed. 

 
  • Author
20 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Thank you and thanks for all the fish...

QM gives us possible outcomes about the subatomic particle's properties . In Relativity however the object has distinguished properties.

1 minute ago, Strange said:
!

Moderator Note

Your incredulity is not a valid argument. Unless you can show an error in the mathematics this thread will be closed. 

 

No wrong in mathematics . Wrong in combining those 2 concepts which are unfamiliar with each other.

2 minutes ago, AUDI R6 said:

Tell me how it works...

Why, you can't even understand what science is after it was explained to you multiple times!!

I think you are just pretending to be this stupid and this is just fun trolling for you.  Reported as such.

  • Author
1 minute ago, Strange said:
!

Moderator Note

Your incredulity is not a valid argument. Unless you can show an error in the mathematics this thread will be closed. 

 

Relativity is applied to real objects with distinguished properties . Quantum mechanics gives us a prediction  of the outcome of a subatomic particle's properties . They are not "physically" connected.

1 minute ago, AUDI R6 said:

QM gives us possible outcomes about the subatomic particle's properties . In Relativity however the object has distinguished properties.

You don't understand QM and relative to me ( a very low bar) you don't understand that either. :-p

  • Author
Just now, swansont said:

I thought you knew all physics?

I know what QFT says . I just don;t believe it.

1 minute ago, AUDI R6 said:

Relativity is applied to real objects with distinguished properties . Quantum mechanics gives us a prediction  of the outcome of a subatomic particle's properties . They are not "physically" connected.

Why is this a requirement?

Just now, AUDI R6 said:

I know what QFT says . I just don;t believe it.

Asserted without evidence.

  • Author
Just now, dimreepr said:

You don't understand QM and relative to me ( a very low bar) you don't understand that either. :-p

Yes of course whatever you say.

Just now, swansont said:

Why is this a requirement?

Asserted without evidence.

2 theories must be "physically " connected. They must describe the same situation to be combined .

Just now, AUDI R6 said:

Yes of course whatever you say.

Wow, relatively, you nearly got that right.

  • Author
1 minute ago, AUDI R6 said:

Yes of course whatever you say.

2 theories must be "physically " connected. They must describe the same situation to be combined .

You cant combine QM with Relativity because they describe two different situations . First describes quantum uncertainty of the properties of  a subatomic particle , second describes how time and space are relative to the speed of the observer for real objects . QM gives possible outcome so imaginary objects as well.

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Wow, relatively, you nearly got that right.

Dont you understand sarcasm?

1 minute ago, AUDI R6 said:

2 theories must be "physically " connected.

Asserted without evidence. 

1 minute ago, AUDI R6 said:

They must describe the same situation to be combined .

Can I combine electrostatics with mechanics? Coulomb's law says nothing about the motion of an object, yet I think I can describe the classical motion of a charged particle in proximity to another charged particle.

 

Just now, AUDI R6 said:

You cant combine QM with Relativity because they describe two different situations . First describes quantum uncertainty of the properties of  a subatomic particle , second describes how time and space are relative to the speed of the observer for real objects . QM gives possible outcome so imaginary objects as well.

I thought you knew all of physics.

 

  • Author
1 minute ago, swansont said:

Asserted without evidence. 

Can I combine electrostatics with mechanics? Coulomb's law says nothing about the motion of an object, yet I think I can describe the classical motion of a charged particle in proximity to another charged particle.

 

I thought you knew all of physics.

 

But both electrostatics and mechanics , the object we measure has the same properties .....

Just now, AUDI R6 said:

But both electrostatics and mechanics , the object we measure has the same properties .....

And both theories describe something real .

Unlike QM which doesnt describe only real things but imaginary too.

1 minute ago, AUDI R6 said:

Dont you understand sarcasm?

Do you? :doh:

I'm going to stop now or I'll get a ticking off.

 

1 minute ago, AUDI R6 said:

But both electrostatics and mechanics , the object we measure has the same properties .....

And both theories describe something real .

Unlike QM which doesnt describe only real things but imaginary too.

I can't even...

  • Author
Just now, swansont said:

I can't even...

Mathematically QFT  is correct , but physically it isnt

  • Author
Just now, swansont said:

I refer you to the response I gave some moments ago.

You cant even what?

2 minutes ago, AUDI R6 said:

You cant even what?

I'm guessing he can't even believe he got suckered into a sensible reply.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Configure browser push notifications
Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.